| From: | "Hou, Zhijie" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)cn(dot)fujitsu(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Greg Nancarrow <gregn4422(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Antonin Houska <ah(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Bharath Rupireddy" <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)fujitsu(dot)com> |
| Subject: | RE: Parallel INSERT (INTO ... SELECT ...) |
| Date: | 2021-01-25 11:39:47 |
| Message-ID: | 10974694357f4d4aa1739f58961d485d@G08CNEXMBPEKD05.g08.fujitsu.local |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
When reading the code of rel_max_parallel_hazard_for_modify in 0001.
I thought there are so many places call table_close().
Personally, It's a little confused to me.
Do you think it's better to do the table_open/close outside of rel_max_parallel_hazard_for_modify ?
Like:
static bool rel_max_parallel_hazard_for_modify(Relation rel,
CmdType command_type,
max_parallel_hazard_context *context);
...
Relation relation = table_open(rte->relid, NoLock);
(void) rel_max_parallel_hazard_for_modify(relation, parse->commandType, &context);
table_close(relation, NoLock);
And we seems do not need the lockmode param with the above define.
Best regards,
houzj
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Smith | 2021-01-25 11:39:54 | Re: Single transaction in the tablesync worker? |
| Previous Message | Kyotaro Horiguchi | 2021-01-25 11:39:18 | Re: FETCH FIRST clause PERCENT option |